L
LittleSoldier
Guest
The word “greaser” is an extremely derogatory term used to describe those of Hispanic descent. If this is what you are referring to I request that you discontinue. That term is insulting and racist.
- Status
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Ooohhhhh…J.D. stands for Juvenile Delinquent. Funny thing about that - although I was never a “J.D.” I applied for a job as a counselor in a prison for female teenagers (J.D.s). During my interview I was asked what percentage of girls in that prison had been molested and/or otherwise abused.
I said “99 percent.” I was told I was wrong. The correct amount was 100 percent.
I’ve never forgotten how society abuses its young and then punishes the abused when they react to the abuse.
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Comments.What God has Joined Together: The Annulment Crisis in American CatholicismMy first marriage was miserable. Almost from the get go. My second is wonderful. I would have had a much more miserable life had I been forced to remain married to my first wife.
Re: Annulment, I had a friend once who was Catholic (though I am not certain how devout) who got divorced. He explained to me that he had to get an annulment from the church before he could marry again, and went on to further explain that all he had to do to get the annulment was to write a big enough check. I don’t know if that’s par for the course or not, but I found it interesting, and it seems every Catholic I’ve known who needed one has received them.
He did get his first marriage annulled, and remarried in the church with me in attendance. Some months later the priest who married them had a scandal of his own when it turned out that he, himself, was married.
PS… No, the holy water didn’t boil when I touched it.
National Catholic Reporter, July 3, 1998 by Charles N. Davis
"…For anyone thinking about obtaining an annulment, and especially for people who, like Robert H. Vasoli, are respondents (those who are asked to respond to their former spouse’s application for an annulment and who may wish to contest it), this book is an invaluable, well-researched guide. It takes the reader through the steps to annulment and offers a view of the pitfalls they may encounter – and there are many.
The author is not sympathetic to the annulment process nor to the rationale for granting annulments in the United States. He joins Pope John Paul II’s criticisms of the tribunal system in this country. In 1987 and '88 the pope said disapprovingly that the majority of annulments in America were being granted on psychological grounds that did not involve severe mental illness at the time wedding vows were exchanged. With the pope, Vasoli says the practice undermines the church teaching that marriages are indissoluble.
Vasoli believes that because of the difference between the approaches to annulments in Rome and in the United States, there is a crisis in the church. He makes a strong case that in the American Catholic church the teaching that marriages are indissoluble has been deliberately subverted – annulments are, in effect, a form of Catholic divorce. He says that priests guide petitioners who want an annulment to their diocesan marriage tribunal; canon lawyers and their aides in tribunals, instead of presuming the marriage to be valid, help petitioners find psychological grounds to annul the marriage and rarely inform respondents of their rights to contest or appeal the annulment; courts of review in America rubber stamp original decisions of annulment; and most bishops in the United States – who are supposed to be enforcing the instructions of the pope, canon law and the Roman Rota (the final court of appeal in Rome) – are instead abdicating their responsibility.
In sum, Vasoli says: “The American [Catholic] church suffers a runaway tribunal system, bent on making annulment as easy and painless as possible.” He decries that “a well-oiled canonical assembly line is in operation, geared to provide apparent ecclesial and juridical legitimacy for divorce and remarriage.”
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n33_v34/ai_21013153/
[bolding added for emphasis]
Unfortunately, obtaining an annulment in the United States is about as easy as falling off a log. Maybe even easier. It’s a scandal and it’s a shame.
J
jmcrae
Guest
It is?
I always thought it was a reference to the hair gel used by boys and young men in the 1950s, together with their attitude of “nobody tells me what to do!” as they race their cars up and down the streets. I didn’t realize it had anything to do with race.
S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
Don’t try to equate any of those acts with the fact that your life is not your own. Not only doesn’t it make sense, but it makes light of wartime atrocities that were yet different one from the other.
God gives everyone free will. Some use it to rob, rape, and murder—others to make and watch porn.
Even a simpleton would know that these are immoral acts.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
“greaser” is an insult, it has always been an insult.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Yes, but I always thought it was an insult against a certain type of boy, without reference to race. I honestly never realized it was a racial epithet.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Listen… it is. Someone will find some dictionary definition that suggests some meanings are otherwise, but none of those people will stand on a street corner in East LA and refer to the locals as “greasers”.Yes, but I always thought it was an insult against a certain type of boy, without reference to race. I honestly never realized it was a racial epithet.
J
jmcrae
Guest
So, how is it that the young John Travolta was considered a “greaser”? He’s even whiter than I am.
E
edwest2
Guest
Wow. Where did you get that weird definition? A Greaser was anyone who wore their hair in a pompadore style and used greasy hair creme to keep it in place, along with a leather jacket. Please stop assuming things.
Peace,
Ed
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Hmmm. How do I say this?So, how is it that the young John Travolta was considered a “greaser”? He’s even whiter than I am.
Address someone of Mexican descent as “greaser” and see what happens to you.
J
jmcrae
Guest
I’m not sure why I would, in the first place. I don’t think of Mexicans or their descendants at all, when I think of greasers.
I’m pretty sure John Travolta isn’t of Mexican descent - his skin tone is pretty pale, for that - but he was the archetype of the greaser, when he was a young man.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Let’s try this with you.
Let’s assume, arguendo, that I am of Hispanic descent and was born and grew up in the Boyle Heights neighborhood of East Los Angeles, and you called me a “greaser” to my face. The result would, charitably speaking, not be a pretty sight. Comprende?
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
I just don’t know how to spell this out for you, so I’ll try again. Where I grew up, if an Anglo called a Mexican-American a “greaser” he could expect to start a knife fight. Is that making things clear?
J
jmcrae
Guest
And again, I still have no idea why anyone would think of doing that, knife fight or not.
In what sense would a person of Mexican descent be considered a “greaser”?
Do they put gel in their hair? Do they drive fast cars? Do they say disrespectful things to women? Do they wear numbered leather jackets decked out in their school colors? Do they say “Ya know” a lot?
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
OK, I’m well past the point where racial epithets on the internet make enough of an impression on me past an attempt to correct more than once. So I’m ending this conversation with you and Ed.And again, I still have no idea why anyone would think of doing that, knife fight or not.
In what sense would a person of Mexican descent be considered a “greaser”?
Do they put gel in their hair? Do they drive fast cars? Do they say disrespectful things to women? Do they wear numbered leather jackets decked out in their school colors? Do they say “Ya know” a lot?
In the interests of Christian charity, don’t call Mexican Americans “greasers”. Its considered a racial epithet. Or, try it in a place where you can’t play word games like this and see what happens.
F
fbl9
Guest
In the vast space between me and jm i doubt one could find enough people of mexican decent to fill one street.Thus the term greaser has totally different meaning.Which jm tried to explain to you but you ignored his words and went merrily on your own rant.Which in turn took this thread way of it’s rails.
L
livnlern
Guest
There was a book later made into a movie called “The Outsiders”. The book was written in 1965 and some of the boys in the book were called greasers. They were NOT of Mexican descent. Maybe Mexicans are called by this term but back then it didn’t necessarily mean the same thing.
Here’s a link to a description of the movie:
imdb.com/title/tt0086066/
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Right, someone should rant about racist terms being used on this forum. That it appears in popular literature or TV shows or movies doesn’t make it less racist. If you really don’t know, the term was and still is a stereotype of Mexicans with greasy hair. Understand? Its a racial stereotype with all the usual connotations attached.
Let me ask if you’re of Mexican American descent and have ever been called a greaser. I’m guessing the answer is “no”.
So you denying that “greaser” is a racist term is arguing from ignorance or incredulity.
I understand that the infamous “N” word" has a other-than-racist meaning in some contexts, but that doesn’t give me permission to use it.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
I’ll I can say to this is take the test. If you think its a meaning less or harmless term, call a Mexican American a “greaser” and see what happens.
- Status